IN the degree of Templar and Knight of Malta, as found in the
seventh edition of "Light on Masonry," page 182, in a lecture in
which the candidate is giving an account of what he had passed
through, he says: "I then took the cup (the upper part of the
human skull) in my hand, and repeated, after the Grand Commander,
the following obligation: 'This pure wine I now take in testimony
of my belief in the mortality of the body and the immortality of
the soul--and may this libation appear as a witness against me
both here and hereafter--and as the sins of the world were laid
upon the head of the Savior, so may all the sins committed by the
person whose skull this was be heaped upon my head, in addition to
my own, should I ever, knowingly or willfully, violate or
transgress any obligation that I have heretofore taken, take at
this time, or shall at any future period take, in relation to any
degree of Masonry or order of Knighthood. So help me God?'" Now,
observe what a horrid imprecation is here. These Knights Templar
and Knights of Malta take their oaths sustained by such a horrid
penalty as this. They say that they will incur this penalty, not
merely if they violate the peculiar obligation of this degree, but
"any obligation that I have heretofore taken, take at this time,
or shall at any future period take, in relation to any degree of
Masonry or order of Knighthood." This is called "the sealed
obligation." Here, in the most solemn manner, the candidate,
drinking wine out of a human skull, takes upon himself this
obligation, under the penalty of a double damnation. What can
exceed the profanity and wickedness of this?

On the 185th page of the same book, we find a note quoted from
the work of Brother Allyn, who renounced Masonry and published on
the subject. I will quote the note entire. Mr. Allyn says of the
fifth libation, or sealed obligation, it "is referred to by
Templars in confidential communications, relative to matters of
great importance, when other Masonic obligations seem insufficient
to secure secresy, silence, and safety. Such, for instance, was
the murder of William Morgan, which was communicated from one
Templar to another, under the pledge, and upon this sealed
obligation." He also remarks, in another place: "When I received
this degree I objected to drink from the human skull, and to take
the profane oath required by the rules of the order. I observed to
the Most Eminent that I supposed that that part of the ceremonies
would be dispensed with. The Sir Knights charged upon me, and the
Most Eminent said: 'Pilgrim, you here see the swords of your
companions drawn to defend you in the discharge of every duty we
require of you. They are also drawn to avenge any violation of the
rules of our order. We expect you to proceed.' A clergyman, an
acquaintance of mine, came forward, and said: 'Companion Allyn,
this part of the ceremonies is never dispensed with. I, and all
the Sir Knights, have drank from the cup and taken the fifth
libation. It is perfectly proper, and will be qualified to your
satisfaction.' I then drank of the cup of double damnation."

Now, can any profanity be more horrible than this? And yet
there is nothing in Masonry, we are told, that is at all
inconsistent with the Christian religion! On the 187th page of the
same volume, the "Knight of the Christian Mark," at the conclusion
of his obligation, says: "All this I promise in the name of the
Father, of the Son, and of the Ho]y Ghost; and if I perform it
not, let me be

ANATHEMA MARANATHA! ANATHEMA MARANATHA!!" Anathema Maranatha is
understood to mean accursed at the Lord's coming. Again, the
"Knights of the Red Cross" take their obligations upon the
following penalty, page 164: "To all of which I do most solemnly
promise and swear, binding myself under no less penalty than that
of having my house torn down, the timbers thereof set up, and I
hanged thereon; and when the last trump shall blow, that I be
forever excluded from the society of all true and courteous
Knights, should I ever, willfully or knowingly, violate any part
of this solemn obligation of Knight of the Red Cross. So help me,
God, and keep me steadfast to keep and perform the same."

The "Knights of the Eagle, and Sovereign Prince of Rose Croix
de Heroden," in receiving this degree, pass through the following,
page 253, of Bernard's eighth edition of "Light on Masonry:"
"During this time the brethren in the second department take off
their black decorations, and put on the red, and, also, uncover
the jewels. The candidate knocks on the door, and the Warden, for
answer, shuts the door in his face. The Master of Ceremonies says:
'These marks of indignity are not sufficiently humiliating; you
must pass through more rigorous proofs, before you can find it.'
He then takes off the candidate the chasuble and black apron, and
puts over him a black cloth, covered with ashes and dust, and says
to him: 'I am going to conduct you into the darkest and most
dismal place, from whence the word shall triumphantly come to the
glory and advantage of Masonry.' He then takes him into the third
apartment, and takes from him his covering, and makes him go three
times around (showing him the representation of the torments of
the damned), when he is led to the door of the chapter, and the
Master of Ceremonies says to him: 'The horrors which you have just
now seen are but a faint representation of those you shall suffer,
if you break through our laws, or infringe the obligation you have
taken.'" In a footnote, the editor says: "This certainly caps the
climax, and renders the institution of Masonry complete. The
torments of the damned, the awful punishment which the Almighty
inflicts on the violators of his righteous law is but a faint
emblem of the punishment which Masonry here declares shall be
inflicted on the violators of Masonic law, or those who are guilty
of an infraction of Masonic obligations!" But I get sick of
pursuing these loathsome and blasphemous details; and I fear I
shall so shock my readers that they will be as wearied as I am
myself. In reading over these oaths, it would seem as if a Masonic
lodge was a place where men had assembled to commit the utmost
blasphemy of which they were capable, to mock and scoff at all
that is sacred, and to beget among themselves the utmost contempt
for every form of moral obligation. These oaths sound as if the
men who were taking and administering them were determined to
annihilate their moral sense, and to render themselves incapable
of making any moral discriminations, and certainly, if they can
see no sin in taking and administering such oaths under such
penalties, they have succeeded, whether intentionally or not, in
rendering themselves utterly blind, as regards the moral character
of their conduct. By repeating their blasphemy they have put out
their own eyes. Now these oaths mean something, or they do not.
Masons, when they take them, mean to abide by them, or they do
not. If they do not, to take them is blasphemy. If they do mean to
abide by them, they are sworn to perform deeds, not only the most
injurious to society, to government, and the church of God of any
that can well be named, but they swear, in case of the violation
of any point of these obligations, to seek to have the penalties
inflicted on the violator. In other words, in such a case, they
swear to commit murder; and every man who adheres to such
obligations is under oath to seek to accomplish the violent death,
not only of every man who shall betray the secrets, but, also, of
everyone who shall violate any point or part of these obligations.
Now, the solemn question arises, are these oaths a mere farce, a
mere taking of the name of God in vain, in the most trifling
manner, and under the most solemn circumstances? or, are we to
understand that the Masonic institution is a conspiracy, its
members taking, in all seriousness and good faith, such horrid
oaths to do such horrid deeds, upon such horrid penalties? Which
are we to understand to be true? If either is true, I ask the
church of God, I ask the world, what more abominable institution
ever existed than this? And yet we are told that in all this
trifling with oaths, or, if not trifling, this horrid conspiracy,
there is nothing inconsistent with the Christian religion! And
even ministers of the Gospel are found who can justify it and
eulogize it in a manner most profane, and even blasphemous. Now,
in charity, I suppose it to be true that the great mass of Masons,
who are nominally so, and who have, in a hurry and under great
excitement, taken more or less of the degrees, have only a very
confused conception of what Masonry really is. Surely, if Masons
really understood what Masonry is, as it is delineated in these
books, no Christian Mason would think himself at liberty to remain
another day a member of the fraternity. The fact is, a great many
nominal Masons are not so in reality. It is as plain as possible
that a man, knowing what it is, and embracing it in his heart, can
not be a Christian man. To say he can is to belie the very nature
of Christianity.

But here let me ask, in concluding this article, what is there
in Masonry to justify the taking of such oaths, under such
penalties? If there is any good in Masonry, why should it be
concealed? and why should such oaths be taken to conceal it? If
Masonry is an evil thing, and its secrets are evil, of course, to
take any oath to conceal the wickedness is utterly unjustifiable.
Does Masonry exact these oaths for the sake of concealing from
outsiders the miserable falsehoods that they palm off upon their
candidates, which everywhere abound in Masonry? But what is there
in these stories, if true, that should be concealed? If Hiram
Abiff was murdered, as Masons pretend; if the Ark of the Covenant,
with its sacred contents, was really found in the vault under
ground, as Masons pretend, is there any justifiable reason for
concealing from the whole world these facts. I have sought in vain
for a reason to justify the taking of any oaths at all in Masonry.
And it is passing strange that such oaths, under such penalties,
should ever have been so much as dreamed of by Masons as being
justified by their secrets. The fact is, their stringent secrecy
must be designed, in part, to excite the curiosity of men, and
draw candidates into the snare. The highest Masonic authority has
affirmed that their secrecy is essential to their existence; and
that, if their secrets were exposed, the institution could not
live. Now, this is no doubt true, and is the great reason, as I
conceive, for guarding their secrets with such horrid oaths. But I
said, in an early number, that Masonry is swindle. Where are the
important secrets which they promise to their candidates? For what
do the candidates pay their money but really to be imposed upon?
But it may be well asked, why do Masons, once embarked in Masonry,
go on, from one degree to another multiplying their oaths,
obligations, and imprecations? When they are once within a lodge
to take a degree, they dare not do otherwise than to go forward. I
could quote numerous instances from the writings of seceding
Masons showing how they have been urged from step to step, and
assured, if they would proceed, that everything would be explained
to their satisfaction. They have been told, as in the case of Mr.
Allyn just noticed, that everything would be qualified and
explained to their satisfaction. Upon Mr. Allyn, as we have seen,
the Sir Knights drew their swords when he hesitated to go forward;
and the Most Eminent informed him that he must. go forward, or
their swords would avenge his disobedience.

The fact is, when once within the lodge, they dare not stop
short of taking the obligation belonging to the degree; and they
are persuaded by those who have taken higher degrees, to go
forward from one degree to another.

And the great Masonic argument to keep them steadfast in
concealing the imposition that has been practiced upon them, and
to persuade them not to renounce and expose what they have passed
through, is, that of having their throats cut, their tongues torn
out by the roots, their heart and vitals torn out and thrown to
the vultures of the air, drowning and murder.

Masons profess not to invite or persuade any to join the
lodges; and the candidates, when they come forward for their
degrees, are asked if they come forward of their own free will and
accord. To this, of course, they answer, yes.

But what has made them willing? They have been persuaded to it.
They have been invited to join; --they have been urged to join;
motives of self-interest have been set before them in such a light
as to gain their consent. They are thus made willing; and,
therefore, truthfully say, that they do it of their own free will
and accord.

But it is almost, if not quite, the universal testimony of
renouncing Masons, that they were persuaded to it. They were made
willing to join by such representations as overpersuaded them. I
do not believe that one in five hundred of those who join the
Masonic lodge, join without being persuaded to do so. But let me
say also, that the great mass of Freemasons have never taken more
than the first three degrees. They may know nothing about the
higher degrees. Now in what sense are they responsible for the
wickedness of the institution as revealed in the higher degrees? I
answer, they would not be responsible at all, if they neither knew
anything of those degrees, nor had any opportunity to know
anything of them.

But as these books have been widely circulated, and are
secretly kept by Masons, and are better known to Freemasons at
present by far than they are to the outward world;--those who have
taken the lower degrees, if they continue to sustain the
institution, which is in reality a unit, become morally
responsible for the wickedness of the higher degrees. But the
obligations in the first three degrees are by no means innocent.
They are such obligations as no man has any right to take or to
administer. To adhere to the institution is to indorse it. But
again, why do not Freemasons now, who have these books, and who
know, or ought to know thoroughly the nature, designs, and
tendency of the institution, publicly renounce the whole thing,
confess their sin, and proclaim their independence of the order? I
answer, first--They have seared their consciences by what they
have done, and have, therefore, very little sense of the great
sinfulness of remaining a member of such an abominable
institution. I must say that I am utterly amazed at the want of
conscientiousness among Masons on this subject. As I have said,
they have put out the eyes of their moral sense, and do not at all
appreciate the awful guilt of their position. And, secondly--They
dare not. And if by their oaths they mean anything, it is not to
be wondered at that they are afraid to renounce Freemasonry. Why
the fraternity are under oath to persecute them, to represent them
as perjured vagabonds, to destroy their characters, their
business, and their influence, and to follow them from place to
place, transferring their character after them during their whole
natural life. This surely is enough to deter common men from
renouncing their allegiance to the institution. To be sure, this
danger does not excuse them; but weak as human nature is, it is
not wonderful that it has its influence.

But again, Masons are under oath, if they renounce the order,
to seek the destruction of their lives. And they have given
terrible proof that their oaths are not a dead letter in this
respect, not only in the murder of William Morgan, but of many
others who have renounced their allegiance to the brotherhood. In
a sermon which lies before me, delivered by Rev. Moses Thacher, a
man well known in the Christian world, and who has himself taken
many degrees of Masonry, he says: "The institution is dangerous to
civil and religious rights. It is stained with blood. I have
reliable historical evidence of not less than seven individuals,
including Morgan, murdered under Masonic law." Since this sermon
was preached other cases have come to light, and are constantly
coming to light, in which persons have been murdered for
disclosing Masonic secrets. And if the truth shall ever be known
in this world, I believe it will be found that scores of persons,
in this and other countries, have been murdered for unfaithfulness
to Masonic obligations. Freemasons understand quite well the
malignity of the spirit of Freemasonry. They understand that it
will not argue, that it will not discuss the reasonableness or
unreasonableness, the virtue or the sin of the institution; but
that its argument is assassination. I am now daily in the receipt
of letters from various parts of the country, expressing the
highest satisfaction that anybody can be found who dares write
against the institution at this day. The fact is, there are a
great many men belonging to the institution, who are heartily sick
of it, and would fain be rid of it; but who dare not open their
mouths or whisper to any individual in the world their secret
abhorrence of the institution. But it is time to speak out. And I
do beg my brethren in the ministry, and the whole Christian
Church, to examine it for themselves, and not turn away from
looking the evil in the face until it is too late.

This
file is CERTIFIED BY GOSPEL TRUTH MINISTRIES TO BE
CONFORMED TO THE ORIGINAL TEXT. For authenticity
verification, its contents can be compared to the
original file at www.GospelTruth.net
or by contacting Gospel Truth P.O. Box 6322, Orange, CA
92863. (C)2000. This file is not to be changed in any
way, nor to be sold, nor this seal to be
removed.